At one point, I thought maybe some of the replies were automated, but I was wrong. They may have templated responses that seem unhelpful, but those are not triggered automatically.

Here is the transcript:

0:00 today's question comes from prague0:02 hi how r asks right now when webmaster sends a reconsideration requests0:07 how many chances does it0:08 have to really be read by real human0:10 do you plan to make it possible for webmasters dancer when they get a result0:14 back from google0:15 great questions so whenever you're reconsideration request if you don't0:19 have any manual action by the web's band came so there's no way that we could0:23 do anything in that sense because it's algorithmic media determining where0:27 you're writing0:28 those are automatically closed out so those are looked at by a human being0:32 but hundred-percent of all the other reconsideration requests are looked at0:36 by a real person0:38 we don't have the time to individually reply with the time of detail0:41 uh... and so you know we do think about ways to be more scalable and so0:45 understand it they might not be hata's as satisfying to get0:48 yet we think you're ok or or no you still have issues0:52 but that is a real human that is looking at that and generating the response that0:55 you read back0:57 now the second question was also interesting do you plan to make it0:59 possible for web masters to sort of cancer1:02 when they got a result1:04 if we say for example no we still think there's issues with your site we hope1:07 that you will take some time investigate that and seo1:10 here something that i could do hear something away that i could make that1:13 better after you make some more changes and try to improve things you can always1:16 do another reconsideration requests and so that way you can put it back and from1:21 that person and hopefully talk a little bit about the progress dot just like1:25 immediately resubmitted and say well i think you are wrong1:29 show some reasoning why google should reconsider them into action if we'd1:33 already decided that it was justified before1:36 we've actually been tryin are very experimental program where1:39 when we see someone who's doing donna reconsideration requests more than once1:43 well simple a small number of those and send those to other people to sort of1:47 saying okay1:48 bus to a deeper did hear you know maybe we need to send a little bit more info1:52 or or or1:53 or investigate1:54 in a little more that more detail uh... it's just one of ways that we've just1:58 been experimenting with actually been doing it for quite awhile to try to2:01 figure out okay are there other ways that we can improve our process other2:04 ways that we can communicate more so it's the kind of thing that we don't2:07 guarantee that a few will appeal a couple times they don't get any sort of2:13 uh... morgue2:14 detailed of an answer book there are people reading all of those2:17 reconsideration requests the one thing i would say is just because you get back a2:22 reply that says no we still think there's issues dot just meeting the2:25 appeal again did you do you want to try to identify the issues and if it looks2:29 like you're not doing that then2:31 after while we start to think well2:33 this guy's hard-headed he he doesn't you know if he hasn't been making any2:37 changes at all to respond to the the the sorts of stuff that we think still has2:42 problems with the site2:43 and at that point you know it's not as2:45 productive just keep having that conversation but we do absolutely try to2:50 think about how can we have a lot of2:52 uh... response how can we not do better and a real person does look at those2:56 reconsideration requests and we have been experimenting with different ways2:59 to try to make the process even better